ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Comprehensive evaluation of AT(N) imaging biomarkers for predicting cognitive decline.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFew studies have investigated how different Alzheimer's disease biomarker definitions affect predictions of cognitive decline.
methodsWe predicted cognitive decline using 42 biomarker definitions spanning amyloid beta, tau, and neurodegeneration in 383 ADNI participants with baseline neuroimaging and longitudinal cognitive assessments. We identified optimal predictors for each pathology and variable type (continuous, binary, non-binary categorical) using nested cross-validation. Models were compared against support vector machines (SVMs) incorporating brain-wide pathology. In a subsample, we compared imaging-based biomarkers with biofluids (cerebrospinal fluid and plasma).
resultsWe observed substantial variability in accuracy, even for measures of the same pathology. Tau biomarkers were most accurate, performing comparably to models incorporating all three pathologies. Binarization of biomarkers mostly preserved accuracy, while SVMs trained on brain-wide pathology data generally did not improve performance. Imaging-based biomarkers consistently outperformed biofluid ones. DISCUSSION: Imaging-based biomarker definitions are not interchangeable and can influence the assessment of cognitive decline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.